I have been saying for days that there has to be a concentrated effort to put the truth before women voters.  We need a specific response to this ad. 

Did the article even quote ANY midshipmen at the Academy?  Also, why would Webb show it to a midshipman before publication?  If she's not named or quoted in the article, what would be the point?  As I recall, the article was about his own analysis of the issue and reasoning behind the position he was taking.  Why would he interview anyone for an article expressing his personal opinion about an issue?  It's not like he needed input in order to know what he thought. 

How about all the other people at the Naval Academy at that time who may have been interviewed by Jim Webb at some point? Do they remember being asked to review the article before publication?  This whole thing makes no sense. 

Were there ever any other contexts in which Webb would have been interviewing people at the Academy?  Is it possible that she's just a little confused because it was 27 years ago and her resentments have melded two unrelated episodes into one?  How about asking the other women who were at the Academy, especially Ms. Postenreider, about this bizarre allegation? 

The curiosity is killing me.  Oh, and in the meantime, I think the Webb campaign should issue a challenge to the Allen campaign to establish a rule that each campaign can only talk about things that happened in this century.  Watch Allen's people duck that one.

According to Robert Timberg's superb book "The Nightingale's Song" Webb interviewed several female midshipmen before writing the Washingtonian article (as well as a few men).  It does seem a little odd though that he would give interviewees the chance to read the article before publication (or give them veto power).

What strikes me as the most odd part about this is the fact that she HAS NOT voted in Democratic primaries and that she HAS voted in a Republican presidential primary (perhaps for McCain?)--and that she has also given $500 to the RCCC.  At best she could make an argument that she's a non-aligned independent, but the "Democrat" claim seems to be a little disingenuous.

Allen is obviously trying to push the envelope on this issue, but I suspect there could be a backlash.  Once people find out about the background the net impact seems to be: Why is George Allen so dishonest?

I find it especially ironic given that this is an ad about "truthfulness".

When allen said he was going to run a positive campaign on the issues, I didn't think this would be the main issue.  The only ads I've heard from allen recently on TV and radio all have to do with this from the distant past.  I thought that things like the Iraq and Afghan war might be an issue or maybe corruption in Congress.  I was just doing a search and stumbled across an entire website, http://www.webbagain...  At the bottom it says it was paid for by Friends of George Allen. I just sent in another donation for Webb.  Hopefully he will be flooded with contributions and can get the campaign back to bush and allen and their failures.

I went to the website you mentioned.  Once again, it's all slick looking with a bunch of highlighted quotes from Jim Webb selected to make him look like a real woman hater.  Naturally, there is no place on the site for commentary which might point out the little "inaccuracies" of the quotes or how badly they're taken out of context. 

Gotta go now.  I just threw up a little in my mouth.

Big Lie.  Control.  No chance for the truth to come out.  Ad hominem attacks.  No shame.

I think the best opportunity for Webb to do this is during the upcoming debate on Monday. He should really hammer Allen on his negative attacks and make him look like the empty suit that he is.

Since this debate is going to run statewide, this is Webb's best opportunity to silence Allen. I'm sure a backlash against Allen would follow if Allen continues to take the negative attack route after the debate.

Webb has a prime opportunity on Monday and he should definitely seize it.

 

You are completely on target.  Monday night will be Webb's opportunity to put this issue to rest once and for all by pointing out the relentless negativity of Allen's campaign after he's pledged more than once that he will only campaign on the issues.  Someone (I'm talking to you, debate questioners) needs to ask Allen point blank how continuing this line of attack is relevant.  If Allen replies that it's about character, then Webb should point out that he hasn't thrown Allen's words (both recent and past) back at him; that he hasn't mentioned at all Allen's brazen theft of Durbin's brain injury legislation; that he hasn't attacked Allen's character at all.  He's been trying to make this about the issues and in return is being met with attempted character assassination. 

I agree with your point Jenny.  I think Webb should do this though with a sense of ironic humor.  "Here he said he was going to run his ad on 'positive' ideas and over the past several months it's been nothing but negative attack ads".

Allen would counter: "You started it".  Webb could ask when did I ever attack you personally?

The truth here is that Webb's campaign has only attacked Allen on his stance on issues.  The other attacks have been coming through the print and TV media and the blogs.  Allen himself has provided the fuel for these attacks through his oddly bone-headed actions.

Do Not care about these article written long ago. Allen did nothing as Govenor to help most women out and he has the same record as a Senator. He wants to pollute our planet. He is Bush's rubber stamp. Most women I talk to want the Iraq debacle to end. That's what matters.

Twenty-SIX years ago my husband "baby sat" and "let" me play softball with my friends once a week in the summer.  I was luckier than most.  Or obnoxious.  Or both.

Supports Democrats? I thought we were cut and run? and supported the terrorists? Oh, wait. when Democrats bash Jim Webb and LIE about him it's okay..

But wait a minute.. that lady is no Democrat.

Or she's a freaking idiot.

No self respecting democrat would make an ad for George Allen.

After all of this controversies.

Please, that lady is a republican.

You can't call yourself a democrat if the last democrat you voted for was John F. Kennedy.

lol.

Jim Webb has been the only candidate to run on the issues.  The mere thought that women would perceive Allen as a more women friendly candidate is ludicrous.  Ask Mr. Allen's sister how woman friendly he is.  Look to his positions on family leave and any other issues that would better a woman's position in this country.  Is there any doubt?

I don't think so.

Though I am not the expert on women's issues in my home, my bride of 14 wonderful years has kicked in more glass ceilings than anyone I know and most women I read about. She has followed this campaign very closely and read most of Jim's books, articles, even his speeches.  She assures me the women of Virgina will be safe under Jim's leadership. 

Anyone who's been in the military and understands what it meant when Jim opened up so many operational billets for women, would not even question his stance on women's issues.  Back in the old days, Navy women didn't serve on ships.  These operational billets are the path to promotion for women.  Jim Webb was directly involved in kicking that door down so women could walk through and fully participate in a Navy career.  There are women admirals and more a coming along every year.  Jim Webb certainly deserves credit for what he did for women, and this old article written by Jim, and headlined by the magazine is old news and means nothing.

Look at all the women in his campaign.  The fact speaks for itself.  Jim Webb doesn't have a woman problem.  George Allen has a Jim Webb problem and it's growing every day.

I think your wife and I would agree on many of Jim Webb's the great qualities. One concern I have with these attack ads is that many women are so busy that they are not finding the time to be fully informed so the attacks get traction.

Everyone should go to this link to see an interview the Associated Press had with Ms. Buxbaum:

http://www.dailypres...

Sorry, I don't seem to be able to do little quote boxes on this thing. 

Anyway, our intrepid reporter points out that Ms. Buxbaum's claiming to have been misquoted when there are no quotes attributed to her and she's not named in the article; and she can't identify exactly what those misquotes are. 

The reporter appears not to know that Ms. Buxbaum just happens to be president and CEO of a defense contractor company.  Coinkidink?  I think not.

Goodbye to her credibility.

With his macaca debacle and related blunders, Allen really shot himself in the foot.  Statistics indicate that women are much more likely to find such behavior disturbing.  It follows that Allen put himself at risk of losing more women voters than men. 

By pouring it on so thick, the Allen campaign hopes that those women who were inclined to vote for Allen pre-macaca but changed their minds, will consider this to be an ethical wash and vote for Allen anyway.

Looking at it another way, it provides Republican women who are offended by George Allen's rapid sequence of socially unacceptable blunders a rationale rationalization for continuing to vote Republican.

Maybe there's a better way to say this, but it doesn't come to me right now. 

The dead-in-the-eye, pursed-lipped tsk-tsk sternness is evident in both ads and indicates that the target market of this ad is white women right of center.

wouldnt you  know, webb was a REPUBLICAN!!!!  Toeing the line for  the republicans  , hoping Reagon would beat carter!!!!

Whatever he said as a republican reflects republican values, and not the webb of today

in the military is what exactly?  What was it 27 years ago? Hmmmmmmmmm.....

bwahahahahahhahahahahah ... Webb was indeed a REPUBLICAN back when he wrote those comments.  Hee, hee.